A simple review of news events indicates that in order to counter terrorism it is extremely helpful to be able to ascertain who is within an area defined by a boundary, such as boundary defined as a national border, or within a secured area in an authenticated manner. However, to date there is no economic and efficient method of ascertaining such information. Once admitted within a border, a person is relatively free to traverse an area within a Spatial Domain defined by that border. In addition, it is difficult to ascertain who a person admitted within a Spatial Domain has visited with or come into close proximity to.
It is known to use passports to gain access within a national border. In addition, it is known to utilize a security badge, which may include an identity photo to gain access to a secure area. However, it is very difficult to ascertain where within defined boundaries, a person associated with the passport or the security badge travels and when. It is also very difficult to ascertain who the person may have come into contact with while they are within the defined boundary.
In another aspect, location-based technology has surged in the past decade, and countless applications have integrated location-based features into their functionality. For example, Smartphones generally include a geo-location feature when not able to obtain GPS signals, and some of these software applications for the Smartphone depend on this capability as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,945,948.” However, a Smartphone is not a secure or reliable way to track an Asset other than the Smartphone itself.
Radio-frequency identification (RFID) is an example of wireless transfer of data for the purposes of automatically identifying and tracking tags attached to objects. RFID devices were seen by many as a way to replace barcodes because RFID tags allow a reader wirelessly query a tag and have the tag transmit back information stored on a semiconductor chip included in the tag. RFID tags are useful for readers in close proximity and to convey pre-stored information, but are generally limited to communications within a building or home.
ISO/IEC 20248 specifies a method whereby data stored within a barcode and/or RFID tag is structured and digitally signed. The purpose of the standard is to provide an open and interoperable method, between services and data carriers, to verify data originality and data integrity in an offline use case. The ISO/IEC 20248 data structure may also be referred to as a “DigSig” and refers to a small, in bit count, digital signature. ISO/IEC 20248 also provides an effective and interoperable method to exchange data messages in the Internet of Things [IoT] and machine to machine [M2M] services allowing intelligent agents in such services to authenticate data messages and detect data tampering.” However, there are some drawbacks in the RFID technology framework and implementations that have limited its ability to provide more value, one of the key limitations is the inability for a RFID to Self-Locate.
Bluetooth has achieved adoption as data transmission protocol for allowing low power devices of many types to communicate and compared to traditional Bluetooth, Bluetooth Smart is designed to provide dramatically reduced power consumption and cost while providing comparable communication capabilities.
Bluetooth is viewed generally as a wireless technology standard for exchanging data over short distances (using short-wavelength UHF radio waves in the ISM band from 2.4 to 2.485 GHz) from fixed and mobile devices, and building personal area networks (PANs). Bluetooth may be managed by a Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG), which has more than 25,000 member companies in the areas of telecommunication, computing, networking, and consumer electronics.” With this level of adoption billions of devices may support the new Bluetooth Low Energy that can enables a myriad of device types and useful applications. As Bluetooth usage becomes larger it may be desirable for people to be able to keep track of Bluetooth enabled devices. It may also be useful to have functionality for other Bluetooth devices to assist in finding missing items.
Internet of Things is currently going through a dramatic growth in market adoption due to the convergence of a variety of technologies that enable low cost low power transmission of data between “Things”. The Internet of Things (IoT) is generally viewed as a network of physical objects or “things” embedded with electronics, software, sensors, and network connectivity, which enables these objects to collect and exchange data. It allows objects to be sensed and controlled remotely across existing network infrastructure, creating opportunities for more direct integration between the physical world and computer-based systems, and resulting in improved efficiency, accuracy and economic benefit; when IoT is augmented with sensors and actuators, the technology becomes an instance of the more general class of cyber-physical systems, which also encompasses technologies such as smart grids, smart homes, intelligent transportation and smart cities. Each thing is uniquely identifiable through its embedded computing system but is able to interoperate within the existing Internet infrastructure.” However, there is no miniature apparatus or reliable method by which the IoT “things” may Self-Locate indoors and outside.
Location Based Services+ is the ability to open and close specific data objects based on the use of location and/or time as (controls and triggers) or as part of complex cryptographic key or hashing systems and the data they provide access to. Location based services today are a part of everything from control systems to smart weapons. They are actively used trillions of times a day and may be one of the most heavily used application-layer decision framework in computing today.” However, the location data that is provided does not typically include any level of authentication to the coordinates. In the era of IoT devices, there are risks of asking or telling an IoT device to take some action and or report information if does not know or can report its actual location.
There are numerous strategies and technologies available for locating objects indoors. Due to the signal attenuation caused by construction materials, the satellite based Global Positioning System (GPS) loses significant power indoors affecting the required coverage for receivers by at least four satellites. In addition, the multiple reflections at surfaces cause multi-path propagation serving for uncontrollable errors. These very same effects are degrading all known solutions for indoor locating which uses electromagnetic waves from indoor transmitters to indoor receivers. Physical and mathematical methods have been applied to compensate for these problems.
An indoor positioning system (IPS) is a system to locate objects or people inside a building using radio waves, magnetic fields, acoustic signals, or other sensory information collected by mobile devices. There are several commercial systems on the market, but there is no standard for an IPS system. System designs must take into account that at least three independent measurements are needed to unambiguously find a location (see trilateration).
Indoor Positioning Systems use different technologies, including distance measurement to nearby anchor nodes (nodes with known positions, e.g., Wi-Fi access points), magnetic positioning, dead reckoning. They either actively locate mobile devices and tags or provide ambient location or environmental context for devices to get sensed. The localized nature of an IPS has resulted in design fragmentation, with systems making use of various optical, radio, or even acoustic technologies.” The challenges of determining precise location requires that the system use highly accurate clocks to calculate TDOA Time Delay of Arrive, just as GPS satellites do provide that information for ground units to process and determine location.
As referenced in U.S. Pat. No. 5,982,324 by Watters et al, Another problem encountered is that the typical clock in a cellular mobile terminal does not measure time precisely, and may have a tendency to drift, generally known as clock drift. Therefore, time measurements may be made by the terminal are not extremely accurate. Which results in an erroneous time and therefore location determination. The error due to the drift grows larger the longer the mobile terminal clock is used.
As referenced in US2014/0375505A1 TV signals may generate a receiver location was taught in U.S. Pat. No. 4,555,707 entitled “Television pulsed navigation system”. Improvements to the art include the use of DTV signals for location, customization of the DTV signal, and the hybridization of DTV broadcast location with other network-based or mobile-based location technologies.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,440,762 provides examples of such infrastructure-based (or network-based) systems for the determination of locations for Wireless mobile units are found in Stilp, et al. The use of collateral information to enhance and even enable location determination in further applications of such infrastructure based systems is described in Maloney, et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,959,580; and further described in Maloney, et al., U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,108,555 and 6,119,013.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,201,499 describes the estimation of forming hyperbolas from the TDOA calculations between the three or more receiving sensors. Transmitter location is estimated from the intersection of two or more independently generated hyper bolas determined from three or more receiving sensors. Methods for determining RF transmitter location based on time difference of arrival are discussed in greater detail in “Statistical Theory of Passive Location Systems” by Don J. Torrieri (IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. AE, 5-20, No. 2, March 1984, pp. 183-198) which is expressly incorporated herein by reference.
Along with the advent of a large number of simple hackable computers (aka IoT Devices) has created well deserved concerns that have slowed or impeded technology adoption in environments where they can provide useful services.
A strong set of security capabilities exist today and our disclosure will outline how we will implement required security framework with open source and custom development in our apparatus with new methods to resolve concerns and provide a trustworthy environment for the growth of machines that can help improve our lives. There is a need for improved Security in the M2M and IoT era and we share some history to some solutions that have been deployed.
Security Counterfeiting: There is a significant global counterfeiting problem that interferes with normal commerce and the free exchange of goods. Counterfeiting is generally accepted to mean to imitate something. Counterfeit products are fake replicas of the real product. Counterfeit products are often produced with the intent to take advantage of the superior value of the imitated product. The word counterfeit frequently describes both the forgeries of currency and documents, as well as the imitations of clothing, handbags, shoes, pharmaceuticals, aviation and automobile parts, watches, electronics (both parts and finished products), software, works of art, toys, movies.”
Security Authentication is generally accepted to mean a goal to provide authentication. It is the act of confirming the truth of an attribute of a single piece of data (a datum) claimed true by an entity. In contrast with identification which refers to the act of stating or otherwise indicating a claim purportedly attesting to a person or thing's identity, authentication is the process of actually confirming that identity. A vendor selling branded items implies authenticity, while he or she may not have evidence that every step in the supply chain was authenticated. Another type of authentication relies on documentation or other external affirmations. In criminal courts, the rules of evidence often require establishing the chain of custody of evidence presented. This can be accomplished through a written evidence log, or by testimony from the police detectives and forensics staff that handled it.”
Security Packaging is generally accepted to mean techniques for minimizing counterfeiting. Packages may include authentication seals and use security printing to help indicate that the package and contents are not counterfeit; these too are subject to counterfeiting. Packages also can include anti-theft devices, such as dye-packs, RFID tags, or electronic article surveillance tags that can be activated or detected by devices at exit points and require specialized tools to deactivate.”
Over the past three decades security technologies have evolved to provide basic capabilities of verifying the integrity of messages between trading parties. A public key infrastructure (PKI) is a set of hardware, software, people, policies, and procedures needed to create, manage, distribute, use, store, and revoke digital certificates and manage public-key encryption.
The purpose of a PKI is to facilitate the secure electronic transfer of information for a range of network activities such as e-commerce, internet banking and confidential email. It is required for activities where simple passwords are an inadequate authentication method and more rigorous proof is required to confirm the identity of the parties involved in the communication and to validate the information being transferred. In order for Enveloped Public Key Encryption to be as secure as possible, there needs to be a “gatekeeper” of public and private keys, or else anyone could create key pairs and masquerade as the intended sender of a communication, proposing them as the keys of the intended sender. This digital key “gatekeeper” is known as a certification authority.
A certification authority is a trusted third party that can issue public and private keys, thus certifying public keys. It also works as a depository to store key chain and enforce the trust factor. PKI Key escrow (also known as a “fair” cryptosystem) is an arrangement in which the keys needed to decrypt encrypted data are held in escrow so that, under certain circumstances, an authorized third party may gain access to those keys. These third parties may include businesses, who may want access to employees' private communications, or governments, who may wish to be able to view the contents of encrypted communications.”
Public Private Key methods have become the defacto standard for encryption of electronic Messages between systems. In 1977, a generalization of Cocks' scheme was independently invented by Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman, all then at MIT. The latter authors published their work in 1978, and the algorithm came to be known as RSA, from their initials. RSA uses exponentiation modulo a product of two very large primes, to encrypt and decrypt, performing both public key encryption and public key digital signature. Its security is connected to the extreme difficulty of factoring large integers, a problem for which there is no known efficient general technique. Public-key cryptography refers to a set of cryptographic algorithms that are based on mathematical problems that currently admit no efficient solution—particularly those inherent in certain integer factorization, discrete logarithm, and elliptic curve relationships.
It is computationally easy for a user to generate a public and private key-pair and to use it for encryption and decryption. The strength lies in the “impossibility” (computational impracticality) for a properly generated private key to be determined from its corresponding public key. Thus the public key may be published without compromising security. Security depends only on keeping the private key private.”
A Secure Hash Algorithm 2) SHA-2) is a set of cryptographic hash functions designed by the NSA. [3] SHA stands for Secure Hash Algorithm. Cryptographic hash functions are mathematical operations run on digital data; by comparing the computed “hash” (the output from execution of the algorithm) to a known and expected hash value, a person can determine the data's integrity.
The integrity of communication from a person or a machine is critical for one to trust and rely on the message. An important application of secure hashes is verification of message integrity. Determining whether any changes have been made to a message (or a file), for example, can be accomplished by comparing message digests calculated before, and after, transmission (or any other event). For this reason, most digital signature algorithms only confirm the authenticity of a hashed digest of the message to be “signed”. Verifying the authenticity of a hashed digest of the message is considered proof that the message itself is authentic. MD5, SHA1, or SHA2 hashes are sometimes posted along with files on websites or forums to allow verification of integrity. This practice establishes a chain of trust so long as the hashes are posted on a site authenticated by HTTPS.
In this era of M2M, and IoT where machines and things are communicating what can be critical information, the authenticity is critical as well. Digital signatures, in which a message is signed with the sender's private key and can be verified by anyone who has access to the sender's public key. This verification proves that the sender had access to the private key, and therefore is likely to be the person associated with the public key. This also ensures that the message has not been tampered with, as any manipulation of the message will result in changes to the encoded message digest, which otherwise remains unchanged between the sender and receiver.
Physical products that have been serialized for many reasons, most importantly it is so individual items can be tracked. In the world of computerized objects, they have also been serialized, typically with very large “product keys” for verification and activation of a purchased electronic product. Many times these “keys” can come in the form of a “public key” or as described herein it could also be a UUID.
The intent of UUIDs is to enable distributed systems to uniquely identify information without significant central coordination. In this context the word unique should be taken to mean “practically unique” rather than “guaranteed unique”. Since the identifiers have a finite size, it is possible for two differing items to share the same identifier. This is a form of hash collision. The identifier size and generation process need to be selected so as to make this sufficiently improbable in practice.
A UUID may be created and used to identify something with reasonable confidence that a same identifier will not be unintentionally created by anyone to identify something else. Information labeled with UUIDs can therefore be later combined into a single database without needing to resolve identifier (ID) conflicts. A globally unique identifier GUID is a unique reference number used as an identifier in computer software. The term “GUID” typically refers to various implementations of the universally unique identifier (UUID) standard.”
In contrast, symmetric-key algorithms include variations of which have been used for thousands of years and use a single secret key. The single key must be shared and kept private by both the sender and the receiver, for example in both encryption and decryption.
To use a symmetric encryption scheme, the sender and receiver must securely share a key in advance. Because symmetric key algorithms are nearly always much less computationally intensive than asymmetric ones, it is common to exchange a key using a key-exchange algorithm, then transmit data using that key and a symmetric key algorithm. PGP and the SSL/TLS family of schemes use this procedure, and are thus called hybrid cryptosystems.”
Security One time Pads is a well-known technique to implement one time pads to further protect the authenticity of identity. However, there is no public-key scheme with this property, since all public-key schemes are susceptible to a “brute-force key search attack”. Another potential security vulnerability in using asymmetric keys is the possibility of a “man-in-the-middle”attack, in which the communication of public keys is intercepted by a third party (the “man in the middle”) and then modified to provide different public keys instead.
A common fraudster technique used in Internet is spoofing. A spoofing attack is a situation in which one person or program successfully masquerades as another by falsifying data. The false program thereby gains an illegitimate advantage. Spoofing can work with GPS and just about any other technology that provides location information. A GPS spoofing attack attempts to deceive a GPS receiver by broadcasting counterfeit GPS signals, structured to resemble a set of normal GPS signals, or by rebroadcasting genuine signals captured elsewhere or at a different time.
With the massive growth of M2M and IoT devices, the Message that needs to be authenticated may be coming from a machine not a person or any combination thereof. Message authentication involves hashing the message to produce a “digest” and encrypting the digest with the private key to produce a digital signature. Thereafter anyone can verify this signature by (1) computing the hash of the message, (2) decrypting the signature with the signer's public key, and (3) comparing the computed digest with the decrypted digest. Equality between the digests confirms the message is unmodified since it was signed, and that the signer, and no one else, intentionally performed the signature operation. This presumes that the signer's private key has remained secret. The security of such procedure depends on a hash algorithm of such quality that it is computationally impossible to alter or find a substitute message that produces the same digest but studies have shown that even with the MD5 and SHA-1 algorithms, producing an altered or substitute message is not impossible. A current hashing standard for encryption is SHA-2. The message itself can also be used in place of the digest.
With a large number of IoT devices being deployed a large number of network topologies are in use in mesh networks. A mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is a continuously self-configuring, infrastructure-less network of mobile devices connected without wires. Each device in a MANET is free to move independently in any direction, and will therefore change its links to other devices frequently. Each must forward traffic unrelated to its own use, and therefore be a router. The primary challenge in building a MANET is equipping each device to continuously maintain the information required to properly route traffic. Such networks may operate by themselves or may be connected to the larger Internet. They may contain one or multiple and different transceivers between nodes. This results in a highly dynamic, autonomous topology.